<nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:m16nj.1540$uE.222@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Peter" <peternew@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:479cd084$0$22559$8f2e0ebb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> <nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:qZXmj.596$xq2.199@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > "Jim" <jimmy AT hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> > news:4798d681$0$17322$4c368faf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> If TN panels were that bad, Dell would not be selling them by the
>> >> boatloads
>> >> to graphic houses everywhere.
>> >> My 24" Dell is as true as my pro Sony CRT ref monitor when adjusted
>> >> properly.
>> >
>> > "True", within a narrower (in the case of near blacks and near
>> > whites, substantially narrower) color gamut. How im****tant this
>> > is to the original poster will depend on his specific images.
>> >
>> > Graphic artists who don't either spend >$3K for their monitors,
>> > or use CRTs, are the ones who're producing inferior (and often
>> > outright crap) images. There's no shortage of them these days.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> do you mean like this one?
>>
>> http://www.lacie.com/us/company/news/news.htm?id=10320
>>
>> or one of these these?
>>
>> http://www.lacie.com/products/range.htm?id=10016
>>
>> Any I know several high quality graphics people who use any of the
above.
>> Please note the price.
>
> The backlights in these monitors, like all consumer/prosumer
> LCDs will lose 30-50% of their brightness within the first three
> years of use. If the OP doesn't mind spending $2K every few
> years they'll work just fine. But it makes a lot more sense to
> spend $300 or $400 on a CRT which will provide at least
> three years of consistent color (and probably much longer).
>
>
You may be right. But, to me space is im****tant.
BTW There is an interesting discussion on this topic at:
http://www.prophotohome.com/forum/colour-management/58381-lacie-crt-vs-lcd.html
http://tinyurl.com/2xbda7
--
Peter
|
